Seeking Alpha

George Acs

 
View as an RSS Feed
View George Acs' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    I wrote an article, perhaps a year or so ago, that looked at a long list of "free passes" Apple had received. Any of which would have been horrific issues for most companies.

    However, the magic of the products and the unique appeal of Steve Jobs was apparently enough to hold off the critics.

    Well, now it's different.
    May 2 09:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    No doubt that in the short term, it appears that Apple did a great thing for shareholders. Maybe in the long term, as well.

    That doesn't mitigate the fact that their behaviors may be imparting additional tax burden on others.

    Regardless, your page view was worth far more than the penny that I will receive. On behalf of my future heirs, please reconsider.
    May 2 09:12 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    WHatever direction shares take, to me there's no doubt that Apple has returned to the status of being a great trading vehicle.

    The longer it bounces between price levels the more the passion and emotion will dissipate.

    Apple, at least in it's share price, has proven that it's human.
    May 2 09:07 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    The EInhorn suggestion would have eliminated the need to go the bond route, but still would have put common shareholders back one step.

    I think that those who dismiss the role of activists here and Cook's move to appease shareholders are really blinded as to the loss of vitality at the leadership level.
    May 2 09:05 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Take Samsung off the table. It's not readily investable in the US.

    The answer is that times change. A couple of yesterdays ago it was Apple, yesterday it was Google and tomorrow who knows?
    May 2 09:00 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Absolutely. Actually, re-initiate. I last owned shares 4/26/13

    What better way to be heard than to be an insider and have a stake in outcomes?
    May 2 08:58 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Thanks.
    May 2 08:56 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Peterrmac51? Said the man who's named after a computer? How objective can you be?

    Fortunately, you don't have to run a $700 B market cap company, or is it 600 B? No it's now 400 B, to have an opinion.
    May 2 08:56 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    If you were in the business of private equity or hedge funds you would likely be very familiar with blocker corporations, as a means to protect investments from taxation.

    The information you seek is easy to locate. There have only been a handful of traditional IRA accounts that have been reported to have assets in excess of $50 M. They all share the same basic qualities. Simple investment appreciation cannot account for the values of those accounts, but lhe use of specific strategies involving steps unavailable to most people can lead to such values.
    May 2 08:42 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Somehow, people that say that "this will be my last comment" come back for more.

    Let's see if you can stay true to your word.

    I did not say that a buyback was ill-advised. I'm not venturing a guess as to whether the buyback will result in higher share values or not.

    The fact the money managers are scrambling to get shares is as sad a metric as I can imagine. I suppose that window dressing purchases should also then be a metric that we all use to gauge our own investments and direction?

    If you recall, the same scrambling to get Apple into managed portfolios occurred at the first and third quarters of 2012.

    How did that work out?
    May 2 08:33 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Sadly, reading comprehension is not a criteria for commenting.

    Romney's use of tax loopholes was widely criticized, even by members of his own party. Even after the primaries were done.

    The point is that although they were legal, most agreed that what was done was wrong.

    What Apple has done is legal, my contention is that it was wrong.

    I agree and did say that we can never know what Steve Jobs would have done, but we did know his history and did have his 2010 comments, specifically on that topic, at a time that Apple had over $50 B in cash. To say that "Apple did not have the cash in 2010 that it does now" minimizes the fact that it had a substantial amount back then. True, not as much, but the same could be said for yesterday versus today.

    I suppose that you are right in that I do receive some payment for the article, but if I were short Apple or had some misfortune, that's the sort of thing I would disclose.

    No, I've been a happy investor for many years, having had some shares assigned last Friday and looking forward to picking up more if the price dips to the $410-420 level.

    But again, you would have known that ha dthe reading comprehension part kicked in.
    May 2 08:26 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Of all of the various tax deferred accounts I've had, the SEP-IRA was my favorite, precisely for the higher contribution limits, as well as the almost unlimited investment options.

    But no, according to reports, just a plain vanilla IRA, that he was able to fill with the kind of assets that most people could not and whose value was grossly understated, allowing him to simply pack more and more.

    But as I mentioned in another comment, that even when using higher annual contributions and compounding the return for 30 years, you have to achieve an incredible rate of return to come close to $100 M. In the case of an annual $50,000 contribution for 30 years, you would have to achieve 29% a year.
    May 2 08:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Somehow, I missed your point and your allusions.
    May 2 08:11 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Boy, you really do mix your thoughts up.

    The precise reason that Citizens United fought and subsequently won their case against the Federal Election Commission was specifically to lift campaign finance limits off corporations.

    Why do you think corporations wanted that to be the case? That's right, so that they could easily manipulate, as you put it, "low information voters" The funny thing is that you believe liberals want to keep corporations dehumanized in order to do so and corporations want to be humanized to do so.

    Quite a quandary?

    Your theory on currency and inflation and how APple views their role in combatting is quite unique, too.
    May 2 08:08 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    I think you're both right.

    The only thing that amazes me is how often specific "sharks" come out. They must be very passionate.
    May 2 08:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
4,460 Comments
2,679 Likes